Smart and beautiful are not mutually exclusive.
Posted on 06/08/2011 11:00:52 PM PDT by Kevmo
“Dear Mr Alan C.: 1- I have not yet an international patent granted, I have a National patent granted, the international application is still pending”
It does not say “I have a National patent pending.”
Furthermore, Italy is a member of NATO and has a reciprocal agreement with all NATO members to honor any NATO member’s patents granted. That means the U.S. will honor the patent granted in Italy.
If he already has a patent approved in any country, the information and design is of public record and can be seen by anyone.
The patents I have are open public records and the electronic design is for all to see. Furthermore, during the patent protection period ANYONE can build one from the patent design and use it for personal use without prevention. However, they can’t manufacture or sell the ones they make on the retail/distributor level until the patent expires.
I have one patent that expires this year that I’ve been manufacturing since 1993. Upon expiration, anyone can make and sell it.
This is true, but it is also true that the patent examiner may have sent back a rejection on one or more critical elements/claims of the "invention."
In that case, assuming this is NOT a carnival-barker sideshow, it would be fair for the guy to say that the patent office had effectively asked the guy to tweak that element to make the whole system novel.
Additionally, the trouble patenting the thing MIGHT make sense if Rossi and them really don't understand how the thing works themselves.
Hard to protect the magic sauce in a patent if you aren't able to fully understand and describe the mechanism.
He may be afraid that everyone else will figure out the real magic and either leave him in the dust if it works, or leave him in the dustbin if it doesn't.
In reality, the patent doesn't prevent anyone from doing anything.
It only gives you "A SINGLE TOOL" in your arsenal if you decide to GO TO COURT and try to ENJOIN the violator from "manufacture or sell..."
In the case of a small US inventor vs a Chinese conglomerate, c'mon. Fuggedaboutit.
You are doing the right thing by getting out there and building as many as you can as fast as you can. Patenting it will also help increase your value if you license it to someone reputable because it helps indemnify them from patent trolls who may claim prior art against you after you've built $100 million dollars worth of widget.
But realistically, a patent is eff-all worthless these days to a small American inventor.
Great point.
I know a programmer who farmed & ranched on the side, lost his land etc. during the Carter years. Struggled along many years writing inventory/transport software for Cenex and a wholesale food company or two.
Someone he’d gone to school with passed along a Defense Dept fuel-tracking project, 90-day deadline, my buddy gets in done in a month. DoD doesn’t understand-—seems they really haven’t ever seen a project actually ‘finished’.
They send him another, then another-—after six months they fly him to Washington to give him a handshake and a plaque for outstanding performance.
Fast-forward ten years and the guy has a great big home in the country, three or four thousand acres of pasture and cropland and 500 head of Grade-A angus cattle.
A tip o’ the old Stetson to him and to you.
You are correct in the protection of a “small inventor’s” protection of their patent.
It is up to the inventor to use the courts to protect their patent...not the patent office. Furthermore, no action can be taken UNTIL the offender has been formally notified of patent infringement. That is the LEGAL start of infringement no matter how many they made and sold prior to that notice.
One the hardest things to do (from the insight of an inventor such as I) is to evaluate the future market for an item and then determine whether financially feasible to patent it or not.
Of items I’ve patented, that concept was used and the answer was to proceed with the patent. It has paid off beautifully over a very long period.
Many other electronic inventions I’ve made and still manufacture on a wholesale/retail level were never patented since the cost of the item plus the estimated legal costs to protect it could not be realized until about 3/4 through the life of the patent.
The only sales protection I have is my Company’s good reputation of reliability, function and supporting service for the goods manufactured. Through many years, it’s been a very good trade-off.
Several years ago I read an article about a Japanese man who had over 800 patents and now regrets having so many since ALL of his time and money is spent in courts protecting his patents.
More and more, in the face of chinese knockoffs, I think that's really the best way.
Price-only customers are just not worth the trouble.
BS technology alert
Yes, he has an ITALIAN patent granted, and a US Patent pending, both "national".
"Furthermore, Italy is a member of NATO and has a reciprocal agreement with all NATO members to honor any NATO member’s patents granted. That means the U.S. will honor the patent granted in Italy."
First I've ever heard of this. Certainly my patent agent and attorneys haven't ever mentioned any such coverage. I was always told that "foreign filing" was separate and expensive ($10K). And evidently Rossi's patent attorney is unaware of that, because there IS a US Patent application filed, and it has been stated multiple times in multiple places that Eurozone recognition has NOT yet been granted, nor was it "automatic".
"If he already has a patent approved in any country, the information and design is of public record and can be seen by anyone."
Certainly that is true, which is why he filed on the device/method WITHOUT the catalyst as a first step. It will work, and produce excess heat, but not nearly as much as would be the case "with" the catalyst. He has stated repeatedly that if he is obtains international coverage (by which, as I understand it, he means US and Eurozone..but there may be others) on the device/method, then he will file a separate patent on the catalyst system. If not, he will keep the catalyst as a trade secret...hence the "Patent office requires" misnomer (which is probably hyperbole originating with a journalist).
"The patents I have are open public records and the electronic design is for all to see. Furthermore, during the patent protection period ANYONE can build one from the patent design and use it for personal use without prevention. However, they can’t manufacture or sell the ones they make on the retail/distributor level until the patent expires."
Yup. I've got 24+ patents myself, and others pending, so I'm well aware of that. But I don't do the applications or filing myself.
No time for detailed reply.....but great points (all true) from both of you. My company does pretty much the same as DH’s.....if the innovation is “big” and potentially “high impact”, we go patent.....otherwise, we just build it and sell it, and count on quality, service, and future innovations to stay ahead of the “duplicators”.
I like your optimism, it’s pleasant to be around. If this turns out to be the scam I think it is I hope you don’t get discouraged.
“Yup. I’ve got 24+ patents myself, and others pending, so I’m well aware of that. But I don’t do the applications or filing myself. “
FYI, I recommend a very helpful book written by David Pressman called “Patent it yourself.” Last I heard Nolo.com was selling the book.
Many, many years ago I obtained a copy and with it’s help was able to file my first patent without many complications. Even if you don’t use it you will gain very valuable insight into the writing, granting and maintaining patents.
It's about 3 ft tall.
You could put one of these in your basement and power up your end of town ~ at least your neighborhood.
What the headline obviously means is that, in the absence of a patent protecting the technology, Rossi is forced to keep the “catalyst” as a trade secret, and devise some means of keeping that secret if he wants to protect his IP.
Second, what you say is true about every invention and every inventor. If you choose not to pursue a patent, or you fail to get one, you need to keep your idea secret or others can legally copy it.
But once you have filed, you can do what you want, on the assumption that an eventual patent will secure the market.
He's not talking about a US patent, but about a problem with the US Patent Office which has a strict prohibition on patents for perpetual motion devices (and others of that kind that promise more energy out than goes in the hopper. They'd not patent an atom bomb if someone came in with an application.)
He has a quite reasonable fear that entities in the United States will simply copy his device, manufacture it and sell it without paying him royalties, and all because the US isn't going to let him patent it here.
Enrico Fermi and Leo Szilard received U.S. patent #2,708,656 for the nuclear reactor.
Heh--I've been in the scientific research and inventing business for a LOOONNNGGG time. If I "got disappointed" every time something didn't pan out exactly like I wanted it, I wouldn't still be doing it (forty years now).
It may indeed be a scam, or it may be real. I'm "waitin' on data".
But by the same token, I don't automatically "smell scam" if something appears unlikely. I'm sure Mother Nature has a LOT of surprises left for us researchers.
Got it (many years ago), and it is indeed VERY useful. I "do" do all my own drawings, and it has been most helpful there.
I'm in kind of a unique situation in that the patent agent I use retired from the same "giant chemical company" that I did, and we shared office space for a time, so I know him "really" well, and he is "really" good at getting patents. I really don't have the kind of mindset that lends itself to verbal minutia, but it is his forte, and that is one of the traits needed. My talents lie elsewhere (as in sometimes recognizing the trees in the forest.....).
True, but remember, we're talking about journalists here....not exactly the sharpest knives in the drawer.
"Second, what you say is true about every invention and every inventor. If you choose not to pursue a patent, or you fail to get one, you need to keep your idea secret or others can legally copy it."
Absolutely true. I have probably patented only about 5% of the innovations I've made over the years.
"But once you have filed, you can do what you want, on the assumption that an eventual patent will secure the market."
If you "assume" that the patent will issue, blab your IP, and it FAILS to issue, then you're screwed, big time. Which is where Rossi is.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.